We have walked so much the past week! My legs and ankles and feet are really achey. But it's awesome to be at least doing something again.

"Only for today, I will devote 10 minutes of my time to some good reading, remembering that just as food is necessary to the life of the body, so good reading is necessary to the life of the soul." -- Pope John XXIII

Still eating healthy by cutting out grains and dairy, and I feel awesome. I'm down to 187, which is 3ish pounds a week so far. I'm 99.9% sure that I'm gluten intolerant because, for one thing, my acne has cleared up completely. I've not used any benzyol peroxide since I started, and I've had one pimple since then.

Also, on Tuesday, I ate at my Aunts and several hours after finishing a meal that contained grains my stomach got hard and painful, and then an hour after that my body started acting like it was having an allergic reaction with runny and stuffy nose, watery eyes, sneezing, and coughing that was completely gone 24 hours.

Screw calorie counting. I love that for a meal last night I had a handful of cashews, a LARABAR, and five slices of bacon. Mmm, I love bacon.

Rotating between jogging, HIIT Sprints, and cycling throughout the week. Need to add back weight lifting, but just don't feel like doing it yet.

I freaking love Military bases. They have such badass gym equipment and people are hardly there in the mornings and early afternoon. I've been doing weight training as of late, my muscles are in kind of bad shape and I don't like being weak.

Also my triceps are practically nonexistant D:

Eliptical machines are my worst enemy though.

-Because you protected this ephemerally floating world by your own hand
Now simply fold your wings and sleep restfully
Be wrapped up in an eternal tranquility, and love through all eternity

Sleep, by this hand of mine that gently watches over you
I remember you laughing, you crying, you angry
I will never forget for all time until my life is exhausted-
-Kimi ni Kioku, Persona 3-

They're brutal during the "building up endurance" process but even then, they are my favorite gym equipment. The first time I used one, I felt like I had skipped 2 miles, I was having so much fun. And then I stepped down and it was nothing but jelly legs for the rest of the day.

They're brutal during the "building up endurance" process but even then, they are my favorite gym equipment. The first time I used one, I felt like I had skipped 2 miles, I was having so much fun. And then I stepped down and it was nothing but jelly legs for the rest of the day.

I'm definitely a fan of ellipticals. So fun!

I've been walking SOOO much more since moving. My legs are killing me.

"Only for today, I will devote 10 minutes of my time to some good reading, remembering that just as food is necessary to the life of the body, so good reading is necessary to the life of the soul." -- Pope John XXIII

I've been working out on the wii active and I haven't seen any results. It's extremely discouraging, but my mom said the reason people quit working out so quickly is because they don't see results soo enough.

so i lost 20 pounds by cutting back on soda to one a week, but then my weight loss just stopped for about a month and a half. i wasn't doing anything different, it just kind of stopped.

well, for the past month i've started a bit of a routine with my diet where i'm cutting back on how much i eat in a sitting, but also eating more fish and stuff. i'm not really cutting anything out cuz my diet has never been terribly unhealthy but just cutting back. i've always been a believer in moderation.

also avoiding ordering out, unless i have a craving.

seems to be working though cuz i finally broke out of the 20 pound rut i was in and i'm rocketing towards 25. my goal is 60. though 80 would be better. i don't look fat really, but the weight is there. and i want to get back to where i was 8 years ago. especially if i'm going to have to start dating again. >_<

my wife has been going to zumba classes twice a week and has been seeing a lot of results from that, but i feel stupid enough dancing when i'm doing male centric dance moves, zumba is completely chick centric so no chance i'm doing that. so i'm going to start getting on the elliptical while my wife goes to class. (that way i don't have to worry about her ruining my spirit while i'm doing it. maybe i'll be able to keep it up)

what i really want to do is get back in to weight lifting. i really enjoy it. my weight bench is old but fine, but my weight set is crap. i'd really like some new ones, but i'm not about to spend the cash. i can't afford to go to a gym either so i'll just have to suck it up and work with what i have. i miss the gym at my old high school. the equipment there was excellent. ah well.

Back in the gym today after a two month hiatus. Yowzer, I fell out of shape fast! I had to work twice as hard to get up to a speed that used to be easy and normal for me. Guh. Serves me right.

Yoga class tomorrow. I'm pretty impressed with myself, since sticking with yoga for 10 months straight is the longest I've ever stuck with anything health related, ever. It's improved my flexibility and balance by leaps and bounds, helped more than anything else ever has with my back problems, and does wonders for my stress level. Alas, it does not replace cardio. So back to the gym I go.

you snooze, you lose
well I have snozzed and lost
I'm pushing through
I'll disregard the cost
I hear the bells
so fascinating and
I'll slug it out
I'm sick of waiting
and I can
hear the bells are
ringing joyful and triumphant

I'll probably be changing my diet as soon as I get to texas next month, and I'll actually be more serious about it than I've been here. I have to put a lot of effort into helping my husband keep his diet in order, along with recording everything for the nutritionalist here to look at. (That and right now I'm trying to eat all the stuff that's in the freezer and fridge so I don't waste any food when we leave, so I can't really be super picky without wasting food).

You're only supposed to do it for about a couple of months at a time, but when I'm off it I usually just eat a ton of fish and veggies...I do eat rice too though, you can't take the asian out of someone. It's a lot of calculation, but when you have everything written out on a chart, it's really easy to get everything measured out quickly. Because it's such a high protein diet though, you need to eat lots of fish and broccoli for calcium, and protein powder is your friend for getting your protein without spending way too much on meat.

I have been having a lot of fun at the gym though lately. I love strength training, and I usually hop on the cycles for cardio, since I use my bike as my main form of transit. Gonna be a little sad when I move, since I won't be near a base (though I think there's a Marine base that I can get to by bus).

-Because you protected this ephemerally floating world by your own hand
Now simply fold your wings and sleep restfully
Be wrapped up in an eternal tranquility, and love through all eternity

Sleep, by this hand of mine that gently watches over you
I remember you laughing, you crying, you angry
I will never forget for all time until my life is exhausted-
-Kimi ni Kioku, Persona 3-

Any low-carb/ketogenic/carb-cycling program is a fad. It is neither permanent nor healthy long-term. Extended depletion of glycogen stores, muscle atrophy, lowering of basal metabolic rate, plus the illusion of temporary weight (not fat) loss benefit. You cannot efficiently enter Krebs cycle oxidation (aka the tricarboxylic acid cycle/TCA/citric acid/Szent-GyÃ¶rgyi-Krebs cycle) with a low carb diet - and stored fats are only metabolized into free fatty acids (and subsequently into ATP) through the Krebs cycle. You can only lose water and muscle. Success in cases where it exists is due to other factors than the low-carb diet utilized. The short term ketosis-based results also open the individual up to a wide array of long-term health problems. In the 4-5 years of trial-and-error and more recent in-depth study of health and fitness, I've never gone low carb. I eat less carbs than I did before dropping 80-100 pounds permanently (and, not coincidentally, adding sweet muscle mass if I do say so myself), but I certainly don't go so far as Atkins and other fads advise. 3-2-1 macronutrient ratios are usually, and generally, most appropriate, though I fall into a 2-2-1 ratio myself most of the time. 2-2-1, with about 3 moderate intensity resistance exercise sessions weekly focusing on compound movements in a 3-5 set/8-15 rep range, with about 3 30-45 minute cardiovascular sessions of varying intensity (the low-duration end of the range for higher intensity activities, and the higher range for mid-intensity.) Remember, 'cardio' is for exactly what the word means - your cardiovascular system. Cardio is not your primary fat-burning activity, unless it's extremely high-intensity, short-burst. The calories burned through cardio are a pittance compared to the calories burned through resistance exercise plus the increase in BMR that resistance exercise provides. It's not about the calories burned in the 5 hours a week one works out, it's the calories burned in the rest of the 160+ hours in that week - which is a function of your metabolism, for which resistance exercise far outpaces any kind of cardiovascular activity for raising (and raising higher, for longer periods of time - in fact, permanently if the LBM gained is maintained). Just a few hundred caloric-deficit coupled with ample complete-proteins (contained all EAAs), with an equal-to-slightly-higher amount of clean, complex carbs for the energy needed for a well-rounded anaerobic+aerobic routine is the only permanent, healthy solution to fat (not just 'weight') loss. Anything else is, sadly, a fad.

well the problem with the low carb diets like atkins is no one does them right. no carb diets are a joke and not healthy, but lower carb intake isn't bad as long as you take the right kind (ie not super processed stuff and not a lot of carb from sugar). That's why weight lost from those is very quickly gained back.

I personally use carb cycling because of that, it's not low carb, its lowER carb, and seeing as how its designed specifically for bodybuilding, it would be moot if it caused muscle loss. You're actually supposed to eat more carbs on data of heavy training.

it's worked for me and a few people I know but that's just personal experience, and it's only supposed to be done at max like 2 months at a time. I pay less attention to weight and more attention to definitions and measurement anyways, since my frame is very weird.

-Because you protected this ephemerally floating world by your own hand
Now simply fold your wings and sleep restfully
Be wrapped up in an eternal tranquility, and love through all eternity

Sleep, by this hand of mine that gently watches over you
I remember you laughing, you crying, you angry
I will never forget for all time until my life is exhausted-
-Kimi ni Kioku, Persona 3-

I pay less attention to weight and more attention to definitions and measurement anyways, since my frame is very weird.

Everyone should pay more attention to measurements/body composition than to weight. Weight is a nearly irrelevant measure. I've been at around the same weight for months now, yet my measurements keep getting better and my bodyfat keeps getting lower. As far as diet is concerned, I've maintained my 2-2-1 macronutrient ratio, with occasional cheat days countered by occasional low-carb (non-training) days. And as far as routine, I actually cut back on my cardio; I was doing 4-5 sessions of 45-60 minute distance runs weekly, and it's now about 3-4 sessions of 30-45 minute shorter duration/higher intensity activities (unless I have the day off, then I play pickup games of basketball for an hour or so.) And of course resistance training is the cornerstone of the routine; 4 high-intensity, moderate-to-high volume compound lift sessions weekly.

According to the A to Z Weight Loss Study that was done by researchers at Stanford University in 2007 that took a look at four very different diets:

1) The Atkins Diet - Twenty grams a day of carbs for the first two or three months, and then fifty grams thereafter, with as much protein and fat as desired.

2) The Traditional Diet - Restricted calories, carbs making up 60% of all calories, fat at less than 30%, and saturated fats at less than 10%.

3) The Ornish Diet - Fewer than 10% of calories from fat, subjects meditate and exercise.

4) The Zone Diet - 30% calories from protein, 40% from carbs, and 30% from fat.

According to their research, a year after their study began, they found that the Atkins group lost the most weight, their HDL levels went up, their Triglyceride levels went way down, their Blood Pressure went down, and while their LDL went up slightly it became favorably more large and buoyant.

They described their results as such:

Many concerns have been expressed that low-carbohydrate weight-loss diets, high in total and saturated fat, will adversely affect blood lipid levels and cardiovascular ris. These converns have not been substantiated in recent weight-loss trials. The recent trials, like the current study, have consistently reported that triglycerides, HDL-C, blood pressure, and measures of insulin resistance either were not significantly different or were more favorable for the very-low-carbohydrate groups.

These researchers at Stanford university later went on to say:

Two of the more consistent findings in recent trials of low-carbohydrate vs low-fat diets have been higher [LDL cholesterol] concentrations and lower triglyceride concentrations in the low-carbohydrate diets. Although a higher [LDL cholesterol] concentration would appear to be an adverse effect, this may not be the case under these study conditions. The triglyceride-lowering effect of a low-carbohydrate diet leads to an increase in LDL particle size, which is known to decrease atherogenicity (harmfulness of LDL, essentially). In the current study, at 2 months, mean [LDL cholesterol] concentrations increased 2%, and mean triglyceride concentrations decreased by 30% in the Atkins group. These findings are consistent with a beneficial increase in LDL particle size, although LDL particle size was not assessed in our study.

The link I posted earlier describes this idea in further detail. Simply put, starches, grains, and sugars cause an immediate spike in blood sugar levels, promoting an insulin response, which triggers fat storage. Not just a small amount of fat storage, but fat storage that would otherwise not happen. Such a large amount, in fact, that it leaves very little for your body to use as direct energy, and thus further promotes hunger. This insulin response triggers an entire cascade of negative effects, and as a result you're just better off avoiding high-GI carbs altogether. I'm not advocating a very-low-carbohydrate diet, simply a more selective diet. One rich in saturated and animal fats, animal proteins, and selective non-starchy vegetables as a compliment.

According to the A to Z Weight Loss Study that was done by researchers at Stanford University in 2007 that took a look at four very different diets:

1) The Atkins Diet

2) The Traditional Diet

3) The Ornish Diet

4) The Zone Diet

So because Atkins was the least terrible of four terrible diets, it's good? No.

The Atkins Diet - Twenty grams a day of carbs for the first two or three months, and then fifty grams thereafter, with as much protein and fat as desired.

I lol'd. Wanna eat 10,000 calories a day? SURE! Just make sure 9,900 come from fats and proteins. And hormones, cholesterol, glycogen, glucose, lipids, etc are far more complicated than that hack Atkins (or any of his deluded disciples) ever considered.

Alright, in order to put this to bed right away (I was going to wait for a response but I'll just do it now), here's the lowdown: carbohydrate restricted diets of any kind not only sap energy, but negatively impact exercise performance as well as mental performance. The brain, organs, etc require glucose which comes most efficiently from carbohydrates. If you go even several days on restricted carbohydrates, the body tries to preserve essential proteins by producing ketones from the partial burning of fatty acids; as the breakdown continues, ketones build up in the blood causing an abnormal condition called ketosis; weight lost at the start is never fat but water as the kidneys try desperately to keep up with flushing out ketones. Ketogenic diets make your blood more acidic, wreaking havoc on your body's chemical balance and can sometimes lead to severe side effects. And as I mentioned, stored fats are effectively metabolized through Krebs cycle oxidation; low carbohydrate diets cause a reduction in Krebs cycle intermediates resulting in diminished ATP production from fat metabolism (ATP is adenosine-triphosphate; which is the primary chemical source for muscular contraction. ATP is stored in extremely limited amounts in the muscles, quickly used up; the body then turns to PC/creatine phosphate to lend a phosphate to resynthesize ATP, this is also quickly used up, the body then turns to glucose/glycogen, which is the biggest source of anaerobic energy and this is why glycogen-depleting diets are problematic for anyone trying to increase lean-body mass. Increasing lean body mass is the number one way to increase your metabolism, since lean mass burns calories at exponentially higher rates than the rest of your body mass, leading to continually increasing caloric needs, which means the same diet becomes an increasingly greater caloric deficit which leads to increasingly greater fat loss which leads to increasing lean body mass - the revolving cycle of a proper diet which is why it's permanent, not temporary like ketogenic diets.) A large volume of the weight lost through keto is depletion of muscle-and-liver glycogen and water; this will not improve body composition, metabolism or overall health. The body will also rely heavily on amino acids/proteins, leading to breakdown of muscle tissue (actually decreasing lean body mass and therefore lowering metabolism.) Any fat that does eventually get burned through the partial burning of free-fatty-acids will be accompanied by equal-if-not-greater losses in lean body mass. And of course, with little energy or stamina most keto-dieters' workouts are shorter in duration and lesser in intensity than they should be.

I wasn't going to reply to your post before, because there was nothing to reply to.

If the goal is to put on muscle then you definitely do not want to be in ketosis. But it is still very possible to retain any muscle one already has while in ketosis, though some losses are to be expected as with any cutting/fat loss phase. However, you can still be low-carb at say 100g a day, keeping you out of ketosis, ensuring there is glucose for your muscles to burn for energy, eating a surplus of calories to put on muscle, and still obtain the positive effects of avoiding grains, starches, and sugars.

Then what's the point of low-carb? Carbs = calories, calories = energy. The goal is to consume the calories required for the necessary functions of life, with enough proteins for the maintainence of tissues, enough carbs for exertion, and enough lipids for cellular function. Caloric deficit while maintaining adequate macronutrient ratios, not "low-carb" is the whole idea. Most ketogenic diets don't enough get into total calorie estimation, merely telling you to consume a certain number of grams of carbs - but do you know your BMR? Do you know whether you're actually getting a deficit or a surplus? Usually not.

still obtain the positive effects of avoiding grains, starches, and sugars.

This is the crux of the entire argument, right here; that there's something inherently negative about grains, starches and sugars. There isn't. Glycemic Index is an amusing measure at best until we actually understand it - science doesn't yet.

The whole idea is that low-carb is supposed to keep you from "storing" food. This is broscience bullshit. Pure and simple. Carbs = calories = energy. They are no more prone to being stored than other calories. They are either used or stored; Atkins created his program for people he believed had a "condition." - He believed that some obese people didn't overeat, they merely had a metabolic condition relating to carbohydrate utilization. Are you obese? Do you have a carbohydrate metabolism condition? Millions of gullible people take up this program without understanding its purpose or creation - and since then, the "carbohydrate metabolism condition" has never been identified let alone confirmed.

One, this argument was useful - it allowed someone who didn't know much about health/performance nutrition (Wil) to be enlightened about the topic by someone who does know a thing or two or weight loss and athletic diet (me). Second, we're not in a gym. We're on the magical internet. Third, some very useful information was put forth for everyone else to see, possibly benefiting individuals beyond the two opponents involved. Forth, the very idea that you've ever even had the opportunity to have an "argument" at the gym is laughable; if people have the time to argue while actually at the gym, they're spending too much time between sets and aren't focused on the task at hand. I'm at the gym 5 days a week at least 90 minutes a day, for almost 4 years solid - and I've never had an 'argument' at the gym (well, on the basketball court over whether someone's toe was on the 3-point line when they made a shot, perhaps.) Stop posting just for the sake of posting. Contribute something. And don't bother replying unless you're going to refute all 4 points, either.

One, this argument was useful - it allowed someone who didn't know much about health/performance nutrition (Wil) to be enlightened about the topic by someone who does know a thing or two or weight loss and athletic diet (me). Second, we're not in a gym. We're on the magical internet. Third, some very useful information was put forth for everyone else to see, possibly benefiting individuals beyond the two opponents involved. Forth, the very idea that you've ever even had the opportunity to have an "argument" at the gym is laughable; if people have the time to argue while actually at the gym, they're spending too much time between sets and aren't focused on the task at hand. I'm at the gym 5 days a week at least 90 minutes a day, for almost 4 years solid - and I've never had an 'argument' at the gym (well, on the basketball court over whether someone's toe was on the 3-point line when they made a shot, perhaps.) Stop posting just for the sake of posting. Contribute something. And don't bother replying unless you're going to refute all 4 points, either.

Jogging is so painful. I had worked myself up to being able to slowly jog 5 miles, and then I just completely gave up and switched back to the cross trainer... much easier for me. Last weekend was the local marathon/half marathon and I biked downtown to watch some of my friends run (I knew a few people doing each race). It was really inspiring. I would like to work up to doing a half marathon...if I stay here next year the next one is in October. Seems like enough time to me.

I keep feeling like if I can't run it means I'm not in shape (rationally I know that is not true). I've tried so many times to overcome, and I keep giving up! I work out because its fun and I like being healthy... running is not fun. That is a barrier and an attitude I want to get past!

Hopefully this time is different; I'm now trying a diluted variation of high intensity interval training. I do 60 seconds at 6.5 mph (waaay faster than I'm comfortable with, though I know its slow for some people) and then 90 seconds of walking at 4.0 mph. I feel GREAT! I've only been at it for 4 days, and already jogging at 5.0 mph (my usual pace before) feels easier. I just hope I can keep up with it!

No, when I ask you to spot me, I don't mean that you should be lifting the bar and helping when I don't need help. NO, I don't mean you should be helping when I'm surely but slowly lifting it. When struggling and the bar is either going nowhere or starting to come down - that's when you should be helping me.

But no, that doesn't mean I want you to just lift it up as fast as possible.
That means I want you to help a little and lift slowly so my muscles struggle longer so that I can get stronger. Seriously. Common sense.

After going home from college, and a month of not working out due to no access to a gym, I managed to get my friend to bring me to the local gym with him.

With a guest pass working for only a week, I decided to buy and test some Whey Protein powder.

So Monday, worked out. Managed to bench 155 for a couple of sets despite the muscle I've lost.

Brought my protein shake to the gym, over 58 grams of protein.
Drank it immediately after I finished working out.

Went home and ate a peanutbutter sandwich and then a turkey sandwich after about an hour or two.

Ate dinner.

Before going to bed, did some research (learned that you're supposed to take some slowacting protein called Casein when you sleep so your body can draw from it over the hours of rest instead of your own muscles) and decide to mix one scoop (29 grams) of the protein after eating a spoonfull of peanutbutter.

Apparently eating food with/around the time you take in Whey protein is supposed to slow down how long it takes for your body to go through it (since Whey's fast acting)?

Ended up working out pretty hard, benched till I failed. I'm pretty sore today. Mixed about 29 grams/one scoop of the Whey as soon as I woke up.

I don't think I should be seeing results already, but I already look significantly bigger than I did the weeks of summer break where I wasn't working out.

Can't decide if it's all in my mind, or if Whey Protein/Protein shakes in general legitly work this well.